First of all, I believe that the criminal I'm talking about was a real criminal, not just some "random" criminal.
Second of all, Pakistan never even had the option to deny America access him anyway, and I'm willing to be that it would make no difference to the Americans if they did.

I believe that the Japanese surrended just before Hiroshima was bombed. America just turned a deaf ear. That whole incident was a barbaric weapons test.
And the method is not effective, because if something goes wrong or the opposing country retaliate the same way, everybody's fucked. Mutuallly assured destruction is exactly what its acronym says it is.

No one said that. Obama openly said that it was not over.

What I meant by that was that for a weapon to work as a deterrent like the US uses their nukes as a passive defence force, you have to use it at least once. That demonstration of power was Hiroshima.

As a result, everyone now has nukes pointed at each other. All countries are pretty certain the other side won't ever push the button, but they don't want to take any chances either. So now we have a nuclear standoff that no-one wants to escalate or back down from. For now it's the perfect balance. Though it would of course be better if there were no nukes at all, which we are slowly working towards.

Oh, that was all fine then. I'm really glad that a bunch of Japanese people got killed so that people would be scared of America.

I don't believe we are working towards that at all. In fact, I can see plenty more nuclear weapons being made.

Just jumping in to say this is incorrect.

Not as far as I'm aware.

It's one or the other.

Can i get the source of this? I have never heard of this interview.

FYI:I do not support the bombing, i'm just shocked by this.

I will admit to mis-phrasing my original comment.
The Secret History of the Atomic Bomb, Eustace C. Mullins.

I would also just like to make it clear that I am not a conspiracy theorist.

I'm also fairly positive the Japanese were ready to fight to the last man.

They said they were, but it's never the case. Any civilisation in a position to truly test that claim is going extinct regardless of whether or not they successfully repel their enemy.

It's a load of alternative theory bull shit, for as far as we know, we aren't certain that Japan had surrendered or not...so why focus on it, and more to point, how did we get Japan from Obama Bin Laden...err.

I think that maybe all the "official" information available about sensitive matters like this ought to be approached with caution, especially where America is concerned. I think that you should consider looking at this stuff, because if you look at this stuff and compare it to the "real" stuff, you can attempt to subtract the spin. I think that it is unwise to dismiss everything like this as "alternative theory bullshit".

Havoc's apparant advocacy of MAD.

You are right actually, I hadn't eaten for about twelve hours when I said that and was cranky. XD

But it comes down to mind numbing backwards and forwards of "YER IT HAPPENED," "NO I SAY," "YER" "NAH "YER" "NAH" and so forth.

No matter what way you go about it, any alternative theorycrafting wherein atomic weapons weren't used to end WWII ends even more horrifically. There are still pervasive negative effects from that decision, but at least the Japanese male population from that era isn't decimated even more than it currently is.

Jesus Tap-dancing Allah-Yahweh Christ, when will that broken record of surrealistic enlightenment stop getting reiterated ad nauseum? I've heard a lot of people bitch and moan about how "America" thinks that our overseas conflicts are magically concluded, but I've yet to actually hear anyone make such a claim. There's hardly a unified opinion on the matter of Osama's death, nonetheless one that bears any semblance to "game over." Get off the bullshit bandwagon of social wisdom, already.

Since you don't have the common courtesy to reciprocate in an argument without getting testy, I will match you in a similar matter, only I will proof my point... I watched the BBC news, not some one sided news station top class spinster on air, and a group of American's who were subsequently parading around New York drinking like their team had just won the super bowl or something, shouting at the camera, and in case you haven't noticed, America pretty much does seem to think that overseas conflicts will be magically concluded, a significant amount of evidence comes from your government's foreign policy and furthermore, it's actions. And if it doesn't go away, hell you've got the man power, pandemic style propaganda and the sheer naivety to go blundering in and 'make it go away'.

I didn't want to make any more posts in this thread, however I do recommend you all check out multiple news sources (especially the more independent ones).

I'd also recommend you check out the financial backers, associates, etc of the news sources you frequent even though it's pretty time consuming. It does help you get a better look at the "big picture" though IMO.

EDIT: Sometimes though when I'm lazy I'll just check out one or two news services :(

Do you really think our entire country is like that? I watch my local news too and i hear quote "I don't see why people are celebrating, Al-Qaeda is still out there." And "I don't think it will phase them, there just going to select another leader." Today i watched an interview of American Muslims who disagree with Obama's decision to send in ST6 to take out Osama.

You act like our entire populace is in agreement with what happened and completely supports our government and all of its decisions with undying loyalty.

I may be over exaggerating, but so are you. We are not all the bias imperialistic elitists you make us out to be.

It's funny how this went from me saying "The USA uses nukes to passively defend itself, which so far has been pretty effective." to "OMG Havoc supports nukes!!! ZOMG!!!"

Somehow this always happens with anything I say and I can't for the life of me understand why.

I was just thinking this myself today. I'm really not sure whether it's because you're not good at expressing what you're actually thinking, or that everyone assumes you're only going to say something stupid so that they just don't notice it when you do say something intelligent.

It's his avatar. I hate that fucking tiger.

Hi,

Drunk people shouting at a BBC camera do not represent America's government, foreign policy, or the population as a whole.

Please back up your claims better.

Sincerely,

Everyone with half a brain.

The thing is, these images come from across the USA not just New York, I think that even though the guys dead you don't need to have celebrations like you've just won the world cup because that is just wrong, sure it's good he's gone but most normal people say a silent thank you and get on with their lives.

And don't get me started on America's Government, I won't go into much detail but just one point I will make can be conveyed with two words, Sarah Palin...the American's nearly let this woman, who couldn't reply when asked about foreign policy or Iraqi policy, a woman who has never left Alaska, a woman who is still practically McCarthyist, into power.

I don't need to continue.

Maggie Thatcher?

Yeh but Britain was clever enough too hater her fucking guts...then again she did get re-elected. But this is nullified by how awesome we are! Damn it Ridg.

You have a rather warped idea of what the american people are like.

Also, Margerat Thatcher was EXTREMELY competent. Just pure evil.

Don't you think that in itself, American is too broad a term anyway. You cannot put 300 million people into one box, I just meant the people I saw and that it seemed quite a large number, certainly more than a million.

You have to understand that alot of those people probably lost loved ones in either 9/11 or the war it self.

I don't think you're in any position to say that those people should show some humility.

Well you sure used the term very losely then. Just because one person screams "Al-Qaeda is gone." Dosen't mean the whole crowd thinks it is.

Probably a bit of both. I like to think I don't have to spell everything out, but someone proves me wrong every single time.

He hates you too. Can't you see the hate in his eyes?

Americans in general are and always have been very patriotic people, being extremely proud of their country and its flag. Unfortunately they are, also in general, very simple minded people who like to point at the man in charge for everything that works or breaks in their country.

Obama got all the grief for a bad economy, people losing jobs, taxes going up. There was a lot more to it than just him, but at the end of the day people are blaming him personally for it. Now things are reversed and Obama announced the death of an enemy of the nation and suddenly everyone is cheering for him, while all he really did was announce it. Sure, he gave the order, but I doubt he did any more than that.

Surely that does (and can) happen everywhere. I know at the moment alot of people are blaming the primeminister/s for the cuts, etc. and during the recent referendum there were alot of attacks on Nick Clegg personally rather than about his party and policy. Or, on a smaller scale, if a school gets really great exam results one year it's not the students who get the praise, but rather the headteacher and it would be the same if they were to get really bad results.

I don't think it's fair to say that that kind of thinking only happens in one country, especially when you're insulting and stereotyping 300 million people.

I don't necessarily agree with everyone having a massive piss-up after hearing the news, but I think it's understandable. Bin Laden wasn't just a man (and a pretty evil man at that), but he was a symbol of terror, and I can understand the closure or even the relief and feeling of justice that his death brought to many people.

Some people will think that the death of Bin Laden means that Al-Qaeda is finished, but then again there are also some people who believe the moon landing wasn't real. Some people are just stupid.

- Rexy